Obvious Child

Obvious Child, on the surface, is just a simple and well-written indie comedy with charming performances and modest laughs. I walked out of the theatre with a smirk on my face and a slight (if awkward) skip in my step. I decided to hold off on writing a review until it could really marinate with me. My thoughts were essentially that it was “Good, but, nothing special”. Then, this whole fracas with the Supreme Court and the Hobby Lobby took centerstage in the news and on social media, and slowly, I came to the conclusion that: Even if Obvious Child might not be hilarious, it might just be one of the most important and groundbreaking little films in recent memory.

Obvious Child centers around Donna Stern (Jenny Slate), a struggling stand-up comedian who descends into a spiral of self-loathing and drunken voicemails after her cheating boyfriend dumps her in the bathroom of a bar right after one of her sets. After a particularly jarring and uncomfortably self-deprecating stand-up performance, she meets and goes home with Max. (Jake Lacy, or Plop from The Office). Max is an affable All-American type who just might be the sexual pick-me-up that Donna needs. Shortly after their drunken and dance-fueled one-night-stand, Donna discovers that she is pregnant and shortly comes to terms with the fact that the most responsible thing to do, is have an abortion.

This movie handles the touchy subject in a manner that I have not seen before. It is not meant or even suggested to be a source of political debate, it is not a set-up for a punchline, It isn’t even a source of personal confusion or conflict for Donna. She is confident and calm in her decision. The only concrete objection that she expresses is the procedure’s cost as compared to her monthly rent. This is not to say that Donna does not acknowledge the sensitivity of the topic. She does, but her misgivings come in the form of her struggle to inform the people she loves of her decision. Her best friend, Nellie (Gaby Hoffman, who is proving herself to be a goddess of indie comedies) is nothing but supportive of Donna, providing her with confidence informed by her own experience with abortion. Even her parents are understanding of her decision. Her main obstacle is whether or not to tell Max. Donna’s journey from her ultimate decision to the procedure is revolutionary in the sense that she is never portrayed as a victim of circumstance. She is in control of her life and of her body in every sense. With all of her neuroses and awkwardness, Donna is one of the strongest female characters in the realm of modern cinema. Abortion isn’t so much a theme of the movie as it is a plot-device. It is just a given circumstance that serves as a through-line for Donna’s quest for independence and self-assuredness.

The film astutely uses Donna’s stand-up sets as checkpoints for her journey to adulthood. Donna is not a great comedian, and her routines do not illicit a lot of big laughs from the audience (both onscreen and in the theatre). Donna’s comedy has more of a stream-of-consciousness feel to it, than actual set-ups and punchlines. A lot of her struggles as an artist come from her unwillingness to completely let go and be herself onstage. This is pretty fascinating, because as an actress, Slate is as down to earth and honest as it gets. She is truly wonderful and this performance will prove to be the first of many for this relatively new actress.

The film pulls a few punches with the ending. It all wraps up a little cliched and nicely, given the overall tone of the film and its subject matter. Also, at only 81 minutes, it all feels over way too soon. However, that speaks more of the film’s charm and watchability more than anything else.

I really hope that some of the more conservative fundamentalists of this country see this film. It has the power and potential to inspire a lot of empathy and understanding regarding this hot-button issue. We all have a Donna in our lives, and even the most cold-hearted of our species will be able to connect with Slate’s performance enough to quell their ignorance, if only for 81 minutes.

Filgrimage TOP TEN FILMS OF 2013

FILGRIMAGE TOP TEN

Here are some critically lauded movies that will not be in the Top Ten so get them out of your head now!

Gravity: Visually stunning, but dramatically unsatisfying
American Hustle: A good movie, but too frenetic and jumbled for me to appreciate it for more than that.
12 Years a Slave: Meh
Inside Llewyn Davis: Didn't see it
Nebraska: Didn't see it

Drumroll Please!.........no?......okay, then.

Honorable Mentions: Much Ado About Nothing, Man of Steel, Blue Jasmine, The Wolverine, The Spectacular Now, Iron Man 3

10. Captain Phillips

One of the most gripping and suspenseful movies I have seen in a long time. Captain Phillips managed to literally keep me on the edge of my seat for 90% of its total running time. A lot of credit has to be given to Paul Greengrass for creating tight and claustrophobic environments for his actors to sweat in, increasing the tension in every scene. Knowing the ending to the story before I sat down did absolutely nothing to ease my anxiety throughout the film, and that's pretty impressive. Anchored (Ha!) by great performances from both Tom Hanks and Barkhad Abdi, this movie was a true gem and one that I waited way too long to see.

9. Her

In the hands of another filmmaker, Her easily could have been a disaster. Its premise, a man falling in love with a computer program, is laughable on paper, and to make it into a concise and serious film is a daunting task. Luckily, Spike Jonze not only delivers a fantastic film with a haunting and reflective message, he also gives us one of the most beautifully honest love stories ever put to celluloid. Joaquin Phoenix's performance alone makes the movie worth gushing over, but its Jonze's script that lets this one take the cake. Jonze's writing has the ability to convey powerful emotions with simplistic dialogue and almost magical-realist universes that hold a funhouse mirror to our own existence. Let's hope he keeps getting more chances to entertain and enlighten us in the years to come.

8. Escape From Tomorrow

Filming a full-length psychological horror film film in Disney World? With handheld cameras? Without Disney employees knowing? Impossible, you say? Well, that's what I would have thought before I saw what was both the most terrifying and fascinating movie I saw all year. The film follows a recently unemployed father of two on his last day of a family trip to Disney World. Slowly, the constant barrage of cartoon faces and existential angst cause him to slowly lose his sanity, turning "The Happiest Place on Earth" into a nightmarish hellscape which he cannot escape from. Most of this film's appeal lies in its concept, that being, a movie shot entirely in secret in one of the most heavily surveillanced places in the country. That's what piqued my interest, however I was not expecting the film to be such an effective mindfuck. It's David Lynch-esque cinematography and it's deviously understated black and white color palette heighten the film's overall impishly disturbing tone. This movie will change the way you look at the idealized concept of Disneyworld, and family vacations in general, in a way that you never imagined, if only for a short while. An under the radar film that is truly chilling and fascinating, if nothing else.

7. Philomena

Heartwarming, to say the least. One of my favorite actors, Steve Coogan delivers both a hilariously understated performance as well as one of the year's best screenplays. Coogan plays a disgraced British journalist who decides to help an elderly Irish woman find her long-lost son. What could have been a sappy, manipulative tear-jerker turns out to be more like a classic "road movie". Both charming and surprisingly thought-provoking, Philomena was one of the most pleasant surprises of this year that doesn't seem to be going unnoticed, which is fantastic. Judi Dench gives my favorite performance of her long and distinguished career as Philomena Lee; A seemingly happy-go-lucky woman who is unfettered by modern social mores and has more than a few demons on her back. Dench is normally known for playing stern and focused authoritative figures, at least in the past few years of her career. Philomena Lee is anything but, she is fun loving, forgiving, and possibly the most likable character from any film this year.

6. Wolf of Wall Street

Martin Scorsese pulls no punches in this three-hour epic chronicling the career of convicted crooked stockbroker, Jordan Belfort. The movie feels less like a biopic and more like an epic historical saga. Everything about the film is excessive and unapologetic, and all of that is done for effect, despite what several fratboys you know might believe. The dialogue is filthy. The drugs and alcohol are free-flowing, and the nudity is........plentiful. Scorsese has a track record of showcasing morally questionable and even reprahensible characters without judging them. A good deal of people have taken the movie to task for seemingly celebrating greed, misogyny, and overall recklessness, but I believe that this is exactly why the movie works. By allowing the cast to truly live to their full raucous potential, the movie turns into a fascinating character study, rather than a fable of any sort. Leonardo DiCaprio delivers what I believe to be his greatest performance in this brilliant piece of cinema.

5. Fruitvale Station

Not an easy viewing experience at all. Fruitvale Station was a very transformative film for me, and one that I frankly needed to see. It changed the way that I viewed the Oscar Grant shooting of 2009. It changed the way I looked at police brutality in general. It changed me. Plain and simple. No movie in recent memory has hit me as hard as this one did. It is really a shame that this film went ignored by the Oscars as it is not only an impressive first feature effort from Ryan Coogler, but also has one of the most touching performances of the year from Michael B. Jordan as Oscar Grant, a young reformed convict with a heart of gold, but who is not without his flaws. It would have been really easy for Coogler to paint Oscar as a martyr, but instead he chooses to show his inherent flaws, in order for us to truly understand him as a man, rather than painting him as a complete saint in order to simply spark outrage during the film's climax. An essential film for anyone who remembers the anger and confusion that followed after that fateful New Year's Eve

4. Pacific Rim

Guierllmo Del Toro is one of the few true artists working in film today. A true creative behemoth, Del Toro never fails to disappoint in terms of creating fascinating new worlds and some of the coolest set and character designs around. This movie was not the most moving or thought-provoking film of the year. Not by a long shot. It was, however, the most fun I had at the movies all year. That counts for a lot in my book. I go to the movies, essentially, to be entertained. If I get enlightened or learn something along the way, that is awesome, but sometimes you just want to sit back, relax, and watch giant robots punch giants monsters in the face. Also, Ron Perlman's involvement in any project almost guarantees it a spot in my top 10.

3. Side Effects

It's a shame that Side Effects may very well be Steven Soderbergh's last theatrically released film, as it shows him at the top of his game. Side Effects is a taut and well-constructed thriller with a great cast and a surprisingly well-thought out script. A fascinating examination of the pharmaceutical industry and mental illness in general. I can't really say much more about it without giving too much away, but this movie is outstanding. It also got me to finally embrace Jude Law as a good actor, which is an uphill battle that went on for far too long.

2. Dallas Buyers Club

Perhaps the most important film to come out this year, Dallas Buyers Club is a brilliant story about intolerance and survival in the early years of the AIDS epidemic. This film does not pull any punches an to be honest, the first 45 minutes were so bleak and disheartening that I almost wanted to leave the theatre. Thankfully, I held back the sobs and watched the movie unfold into one of the greatest stories told on film in the past decade. You can't talk about this movie without mentioning the full-on acting clinic that McConaughey puts on as Ron Woodruff, a hard-drinking Texas degenerate who is told he has 30 days to live. McConaughey disappears into his role, an impressive feat given that for the better part of his career so far he basically played the same character in a string of half-hearted and forgettable rom-coms. He plays Woodruff with a pitch-perfect cocktail of gruffness and sensibility that I have not seen from him, or any other actor for that matter, in a long time. The movie rests squarely on his shoulders and he carries the shit out of it. This film is brutal and can be hard to sit through, but damn it all if It wasn't excellent



1. Kings of Summer

What can I say about this movie that I haven't said already. It's uproariously funny, genuinely heartfelt, and visually stunning. One of the best coming-of-age stories in recent memories. The film takes the simple storyline of three young men deciding to run away from home and building a house in the wilderness and turns it into so much more. This movie, rather than focusing on the freedom and carefree nature of being a teenager, decides to focus more on the selfishness and frustration of adolescent years. This approach turns what could have been a sappy and over sentimental fable into an honest story of what it means to truly grow up. Some of the finest young actors working today give enthralling and hilarious performances, and prove to the world that we should be seeing a lot more of them in the future. Not only the best film of the year, but one of my favorite movies of all time.

Filgrimage's Worst Movies of 2013

2013 was a pretty excellent year for movies. I saw a lot of stuff that I really liked, but as The Dalai Lama once said, "You can't have a sunny day without a few rainy days". There were a few truly awful films that were released this year, luckily not so many. My preliminary list only consisted of eight total films, which I then narrowed down to five. Here......We.......Go

FILGRIMAGE'S WORST MOVIES of 2013

5. World War Z

I am really torn about this one, because I really dug what this movie was going for. A more panoramic take on the zombie film. An attempt to focus more on the worldwide effects and implications of the zombie apocalypse trope, rather than the carnage and make-up effects. I was really excited for it. However, I ended up walking out about halfway through the third act. I have only walked out of a movie once before in my life. It was almost ten years ago and the movie was Win a Date with Tad Hamilton. So, that’s a big deal for me. I just didn’t care about what was going on at all. The stakes were high and the action was intense, but I gave ZERO fucks about what happened to any of the people on screen. There was nothing special or unique about any of the characters, giving the movie more of an unfeeling pseudo documentary vibe that really took away from what it was trying to do. This might be one of those movies that I like better if and when I see it again, but just from the one experience, it was one of the worst I saw all year

4. Gangster Squad

Last minute reshoots are never a good sign for a movie, and while I understand the producer’s decision to change the film’s climax due to its similarity to the Aurora Theatre Shooting of 2012, I can’t help but wonder if this movie would have been any better had we had seen it as it was originally meant to be seen. The truth is though, it probably would not have mattered much. This Los Angeles-based gangster fable doesn’t do anything that previous genre movies haven’t done better. It’s far too campy to be serious and too morose to be any fun. Couple that with a completely charmless leading man turn from Ryan Gosling and what probably will be remembered as Sean Penn’s WORST performance of all time.

3. Oblivion.

I completely forgot about this movie about three days after I saw it in theatres.  I never thought a big budget science fiction epic starring Tom Cruise and directed by the man who brought us Tron:Legacy could be so incredibly dull. It looks amazing, but unfortunately, other than the visuals, Oblivion never offers anything remotely interesting or memorable. The whole thing feels like a car commercial from the future. It is predictable and derivative of pretty much every great sci-fi movie. Very disappointing.

2. Only God Forgives

Oh, look who makes another appearance on the Worst Films list. Mr. Ryan Gosling. I have had it with this guy! I don’t care how handsome or aloof you are. Pick better projects, my friend!  Don’t you try that “Hey,Girl” shit on me! Whew! Sorry about that. Watching this film is really an exercise in masochism. I appreciated the simplicity of the film’s central story as well as some of the aesthetic choices, such as the lighting and the…...well, the lighting. The endless tide of gratuitous and indifferent violence in this film takes away from any meaning or message it set out to have. Indeed a spectacle, but a pointless one.

1. Now You See Me

(Sigh….) Where to begin: This movie holds the distinction of being the first film I’ve seen to actually make me physically angry with its awfulness. I was squirming in my seat and clenching my right fist. Having to deal with one absurd plot turn or unironically cheesy line after another…...after another…...after another. I had half a mind to punch a hole into the screen. If I didn’t have my trusty Coke Zero and Red Vines for comfort, I probably would have, and would be editing this list from a federally monitored computer lab in the Looney Bin. This movie’s failure as a whole can be explained in four subcatagories:

A) Absurd and Overall Poorly Written Script

The screenwriters take a promising concept and turn it into a joyless farce that sacrifices fun for a weirdly pious message about the “true art of illusion”

B) Lazily acted

When Dave Franco is the most charismatic actor in your film, especially in a cast that features the likes of Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Woody Harrelson, and Mark Ruffalo, something has gone horribly wrong. Sorry, Dave.

C) Obscenely directed and edited

The whole movie feels frenetic and choppy. It’s too bright. It’s too loud, and the visuals never leave anything up to the imagination, which is….you know….sort of the point of magic…...right?

D) An ending that insults both the audience’s intelligence and the fabric of basic storytelling

Worst.Twist.Ever.  Most of the people who enjoyed this movie who I have talked to have cited the “Unpredictability” and “surprise” of the twist ending as one of the best parts of the film. Here’s the thing. I love a good twist as much as the next guy, but if its based in nothing but “GOTCHA!”, it’s not good. It’s cheap and horrible. If Forrest Gump ended with Forrest going on a killing spree at the local post office, that would have been a CRAZY twist, but it would have also made it a shitty movie.

I can’t stress how much I hated this movie. Please, avoid it.

The Filgrimage Top Ten will be posted at the end of the week, and it is going to be a doozy. Stay tuned and thanks for reading.

Playing Catch-Up

So, I haven't posted in a while due to a number of factors. Namely, being super busy with theatre stuff and not having a laptop for a few weeks. I will start posting reviews regularly again, but here's a little snippet regarding each of the movies I have seen since my last post.

Kick-Ass 2: Glad they made a sequel to one of my favorite superhero movies of all time, but wish they would have taken a little more time to tighten the script up. The movie is sloppy all around and manages to almost ruin the character of Hit-Girl by putting her in a Mean Girls-esque plot for the majority of the film. Also a total waste of the talents of Jim Carrey. So much potential, just didn't quite reach it in any aspects

5.5/10

You're Next: Really solid horror flick that managed to consistently balance some really creative and authentic scares with disturbingly dark humor. Not quite as original as I had hoped it would be, but still a great time at the movies

7/10

The Spectacular Now: A really nice and simple love story featuring two amazing performances from Miles Teller and Shailene Woodley. One of only two movies so far this year that has made me shed tears in the theater. There was a slightly misogynistic tone throughout the film that prevented me from loving it, but overall, it was sweet and heartfelt enough to almost make up for its flaws

7.5/10

Gravity- This is one of the most beautifully shot films I have ever seen. I saw it in IMAX, which I NEVER do. Surprisingly transcendent and really cool to look at. Unfortunately, the script left a lot to be desired and the overall plot of the movie did not really do anything for me. More of a one-time viewing experience for me. See it for the visuals but do not expect to be enlightened or moved in any significant way

10/10 for the visuals
5/10 for the rest of the movie

7.5 overall

I think that is about it. Thank you for your patience

In a World...

I've been enamored with Lake Bell ever since I saw her in What Happens in Vegas. Remember that movie? The one with Cameron Diaz and Ashton Kutcher, where they get married in Vegas. Well, it is as good as it sounds, but Lake Bell played a supporting role and was easily the best part of the movie. Cute, funny, energetic. She is my dream girl, so naturally when I found out she was writing, directing, and starring in In a World..., a film about the trials and tribulations of a struggling voiceover actress, I was thrilled. The movie did not disappoint. Lake Bell has a definite future as a writer and shows some pretty impressive directing chops. Hopefully, this will be her meal ticket to A-list status and we'll be seeing a lot more of her, both in front of and behind the camera

As I said, In a World... is about Carol, a struggling vocal coach/voiceover artist who deals with the challenges of not only breaking into a small male-dominated industry (Did you know that the last mainstream release to have a female voiceover in its trailer was Gone in 60 Seconds? Back in 2000??) but also the fact that her father is one of the most recognizable and formidable voices in the game. In spite of those hamperings, she suddenly finds herself notable work, and as always...complications ensue.

Lake Bell's script is undeniably sharp and witty, even if it does take a while to get started. The movie's first 30 minutes take a little too long to introduce us to the characters, some of whom turn out to be completely expendable in terms of plot. The jokes are there, there's no doubt, but it felt a tad slow right out of the gate. Fortunately, once things get going, they really get going. The dialogue is unformulaic, the jokes are hilarious, and the dramatic beats are well-paced and heartfelt. It's just a great script, and one that proves to be engaging and entertaining, as it explores an area of the entertainment industry that a lot of folks, film buffs included, do not know a whole lot about.

The direction, though standard, is good considering its the work of somebody doing it for the first time. Everything looks good and the performances never feel out of place or disjointed. One big issue I had with the film in general though, and this has more to do with Lake Bell's filmmaking in general than her specific skills as a director, was the barrage of unnecessary characters. In a World, is not strictly speaking, an ensemble film. It's about Carol and her journey. Lake Bell, no doubt in an effort to draw in more support for her freshman effort, cast a lot of well-known actors and comedians in very small parts in the movie, parts that are not only tiny but completely inconsequential. Nick Offerman, for example, plays a mustache-less sound engineer who maybe has a dozen lines. As a result, his presence in the movie overshadows the film itself at times. We all love Nick Offerman and we expect something memorable from him, but he is really just there to be another recognizable face. It becomes distracting. Ditto goes for Tig Notaro, Eva Longoria (as herself..Why?), and even a little bit from Geena Davis near the end. None of these people give bad performances, but they just make the movie feel crowded as they aren't given anything substantial to do. I would be hard-pressed to believe that these characters were all in Lake Bell's original vision of the story. They were obviously called in to support Lake Bell's first movie, its admirable but it doesn't help the movie any.

There are some really great comedic performances throughout the film. Lake Bell herself is painfully awkward and undeniably charming as Carol, played with a likable fragility that will resonate with a lot of artists who end up seeing the movie. Demetri Martin, one of my favorite comedians for years, is surprisingly great as Louis, sound engineer and Carol's doting love interest/vocal coach. He brings his deadpan sardonic sense of humor right into the role with himself and the results are hysterically sweet. The two of them have real chemistry that fuels the movie's softer moments. Rob Corrdry was the stand-out for me. An actor who has appeared in a wide array of comedies over the past couple years, always sort of playing the same kind of obnoxious older guy supporting role, he gets out of his supposed comfort zone as Moe, Carol's sister's husband who deals with his own host of marital issues alongside Carol's professional struggles. He's heartbreaking and, as always, hilarious. His work in this film, along as his performance in Warm Bodies earlier this year has proven that he is a great actor who is capable of much more than we usually see of him. Ken Marino, Michaela Watkins, and Fred Melamed round out the rest of the main players, all of them doing a fine job, even if their characters all hang on the side of unlikeable more than I would have liked.

In a World... , for a straight-up comedy, surprisingly manages to pull off a very well-thought out commentary and critique of how women struggle in the film industry in some novel ways that you would expect. I don't want to give anything away, but it was pretty brilliant to use "Movie Promo Voiceover" as the platform by which to do its analysis. The themes are universal to almost all aspects of film and acting, but the film makes the situational boundaries specific enough that it all comes off as very novel. Carol's struggle as a female breaking into "the biz" mirrors the struggle of so many women today, both in and out of the entertainment field. The film's conclusion on the subject wraps it up too tightly (It is a comedy after all) but it does leave you with some lingering questions. This was not a movie I was expecting to be enlightened by, yet here I am, hours later, still thinking about what it had to say. If I were to delve fully into it in this review, it would take another nine-to-ten paragraphs. Also, as a man, nothing I have to say about feminism or gender equality really matters.

This is a really good little movie. If I am to take one thing from it, it is that Lake Bell has the potential to be one of the next great comedic writer/directors of our time. It's really funny and showcases some great comedic performances as well as a tight script. I would recommend it to all film buffs out there and anybody who appreciates comedy with indie sensibilities. It has a lot more substance than it gives itself credit for and hopefully will spark some debate regarding women in the film industry.

8/10

Elysium

Over the past couple years, Hollywood has been churning out more and more original science fiction movies. It's great and it's very welcome. Less motivation is behind sequels and remakes (They are still there, but marginally less. A drop in the ocean. But I'll take it) and more focus is on original stories. This year alone, we've had quite a bit of them. Oblivion, Pacific Rim, Looper, Prometheus to name a few. All movie with enormous potential, but none of them have been all that memorable or game-changing. That isn't a standard that all sci-fi films have to measure up to mind you, but still. The last original sci-fi picture to make a truly big impact was Avatar, back in 2009. Elysium could have been that movie. The movie that set a new standard for modern sci-fi. It had everything going for it. A great cast, an exciting director, mind blowing effects, poignant social commentary.....but for some reason it just doesn't quite live up to its potential.

Since the film's trailer gives away the entire first half of the movie, I'll make my summary briefer than usual. Elysium is about an ex-con factory worker named Max (Matt Damon) who lives in 2154 Los Angeles. In the future, everyone one on Earth is pretty much destitute, while the rich get to live in a luxurious space station habit called........I'm drawing a blank on the name. Anyway, Max ends up getting severe radiation poisoning in a work accident and had five days to live. He gears himself up with a powerful exoskeleton suit and...ELYSIUM! THAT'S the name of the space station! Phew. That was close. OK, so Max gets the suit and hatches a plan with some old cronies to get into Elysium to save himself and potentially all of Earth's inhabitants.

Here's the first problem with the movie. Elysium, the space habitat that the entire film's plot hinges on, does not make a whole lot of sense. There is never a lot of context or history given about it other than "This is where the rich people live". It makes just enough sense to serve the narrative of the film, but not much else. How long did it take to build? Was the government complacent in it's creation? Why does everyone from Elysium have a weird pseudo french/robotic accent. It's a really interesting plot device, and it is extremely frustrating that it serves as nothing more than a proverbial finish line. Also: another big important part of the film is the existence of these things called Med-Pods. Futuristic cyber operating tables that can cure any physical ailment, from broken bones to terminal cancer. Again, a very intriguing thing to explore, but it never is. The characters main incentive and purpose to breaking into Elysium is to get access to these Med-Pods, but there are so many questions that are never answered or touched upon. How is this technology possible? Are the Med-Pods manufactured on Earth? If so, isn't there an easier way to harness the technology than by sending a suicide mission into space? These are all pretty annoying cinephile nerd questions to have, I'll admit. It does, however matter a great deal that these questions exist, as there are several more of them throughout the movie and when they add up it makes the film as a whole seem a little hollow. Nothing exists for any other reason than to serve its purpose in the plot. It doesn't make the movie "bad", but it prevents from being anything more than "fine".

Another problem with the movie lies in its aesthetics. Neil Blomkamp brings his distinct dystopian vision from District 9 into this film, and with it, a lot of the same old tricks. The robot police force that keeps the citizens of Earth in line look an awful like the "Prawns" from the director's last film. As a matter of fact, 2154 Los Angeles looks pretty much exactly like 2009 Johannesburg and even though the film's opening title card explains that Earth didn't go completely to shit until around 2080, the majority of the things on planet Earth, from the computers to the factory machines to some of the robotic human counterparts, look like they were made in 1975. I know they are supposed to be in poverty, but still it comes off as more lazy than practical. Again, nit-picky, but it all adds up.

The performances are all fine. Matt Damon is back into ass-kicking form and gives a nice layered performance as Max. Jodie Foster is icy and domineering as ever as Secretary Delacourt, the de facto leader of Elysium. Would have been nice to see more of her though. Sharlto Copley proves to be another problem with the movie, serving as the main villain, Kruger. An insane, amoral mercenary type who will stop at nothing to prevent Max from reaching his goal. Kruger is a great character in theory. Ruthless. Ferocious. Untethered by any sort of ethical code. A classic sci-fi villain. He suffers, however, from what I like to call "Bane Syndrome, which is when a movie's central villain is impossible to understand, both verbally and philosophically. Kruger mumbles his way through the movie committing atrocious acts of violence and making completely manic and off-the-wall decisions with no clear plan or endgame. He makes the movie exciting and ends up being involved in most of the film's memorable moments, but when your antagonist is supposed to be one of the most intimidating and deadly figures in the galaxy: Sharlto Copley, a guy who can't way more that 130 lbs, might not be your best candidate.


Alright enough bitching, there is a quite a bit in this movie that I quite liked. For one, how impressively savage it all is. A film that really earns its R-rating, which is rare for modern big-budget films. There is a lot of swearing and A LOT of carnage. I wasn't expecting it and was ultimately impressed by it. I also appreciated how it showed the true consequences of violence, not social or humanistic consequences, but actual logical consequences. When characters get shot, they die. When a character gets stabbed or grazed by a bullet, they bleed, sometimes for the rest of the movie. Nothing annoys me more than movie characters taking several gunshots or stab wounds to the torso and then soldiering on though the rest of the thing without so much as a wince. It was refreshing to say the least. The movie also features a host of really cool action sequences, particularly in the third act. All the fight choreography is very inventive and gripping to watch, and a lot of that is due to the conception and design of the unique high-tech weapons they use. One of the few characteristics of the film that feels truly futuristic. Whenever there is any sort of violent fight or battle scene, it never feels recycled or cliched, it's all very creative and fun to watch.

Neil Blomkamp seems to want to make sci-fi social commentary his niche, and he really lays out his cards with Elysium. The comparisons between the literal class warfare of the future and what is going on in today's society are pertinent and agonizing, particularly the state of health care. It's more of a framing technique than a main focus, but it is effective and mildly thought-provoking. While the world of Elysium is very bombastic and all too black and white, it is a scary portrait of where we could be heading. The movie has a very honest and heartfelt message, even if a lot of it does get lost in the crossfire.

I liked Elysium. I really did, and I would recommend it to all fans of the genre. It just could have been so much more than it ended up being. The movie's last 30 minutes are nothing short of awesome, but everything preceding it seemed like a means to an end, rather than anything substantial or meaningful in any way. It is, however, better than most modern sci-fi films and that says something. Check it out, but expect entertainment, not enlightenment.


7/10

Prince Avalanche

Prince Avalanche is a quirky little picture with a pretty impressive production story behind it. David Gordon Green, the director, hoping to get back to his indie roots after making Pineapple Express, Your Highness, and The Sitter, all with varying degrees of success, decided to shoot this movie completely in secret. That's right. Nobody besides those who worked on the film knew about it until it was completed. Surprising considering Green's notoriety among film buffs, and the fact that the film stars Emile Hirsch and Paul Rudd, two relatively big name actors. He accomplished this by having a small cast; just Rudd and Hirsch in the lead roles, and one other actor in a smaller capacity, and shooting the film entirely in the backwoods of Bastrop, Texas not long after the area was ravaged by forest fires. The concept of shooting an indie film completely in secret has pros and cons, but regardless about how you feel about the film, you got to hand it to them, it's a pretty damn cool way to make a movie.

The film takes place in the spring of 1988 and tells the story of two men: Alvin, a crotchety wet blanket type, played by Paul Rudd, and Lance, a young, dumb, full of cum southern boy, . The two men are spending the spring making their way along the highway, repainting yellow traffic lines after a decimating fire. The two men have close to nothing in common and spend most of their days in silence either working or camping for the night. Alvin periodically goes fishing and writes letters to his fiance, who also happens to be Lance's older sister. Lance spends his time masturbating and pining for his weekends spent in the city while Alvin stays behind, enjoying the pleasures of solitude. The film mostly consists of idle conversations between these two men, framed by the desolate, yet breathtaking forest. There are moments of levity, as well as high tension, but the overall rhythm of the movie is very calm and almost meditative. As a result , there is a great deal of silence, which is mostly deliberate, but sometimes feels like time-padding more than anything else. Admittedly, it gets a little frustrating.

It's very assuring that David Gordon Green is getting back to his indie roots after roughly 6 years of working with big studios. He is a gifted director and this film is an excellent showcase of what he can do when completely left in control of his devices. He gives the film's setting, the fire ravaged forest, an expressive fairytale vibe that lets us get lost in the beauty of it all without it feeling like the main focus. It acts as a perfect backdrop to the character's existence. There are some really beautiful shots in this movie, and its almost worth checking out for the direction alone, because it really is the best thing about the movie. Actually, the whole movie is aesthetically fantastic. The film looks gorgeous, and also features an eclectic and low-key score from Explosions in the Sky, who seem to abandon their distinguishable post-rock haunting instrumentals for a more downplayed acoustic feel. The score is a perfect match with Green's visuals.

Another big highlight is Paul Rudd's performance which is totally against-type and nothing short of stunning. Alvin is almost the antithesis of most of the roles on Rudd's resume. He is boring, unadventurous, and sort of socially repulsive. Paul Rudd has mastered the art of portraying likeable leading man characters. Guys you want to hang and have a beer with. Alvin is none of these things. He's not a bad person, he's just so totally unremarkable and flat that its irritating. Much kudos to him for pulling it off. Hirsch, on the other hand, is kind of a disappointment. Lance is also a kind of revolting character. He's immature and vulgar, and more importantly selfish. He's also kind of disgusting as a human. Emile Hirsch is just a little too good-looking and charming to be all that believable and as a result overcompensates by overplaying stupid. He's a good foil to Rudd, but overall his performance is pretty one-note. It's not entirely his fault. It's mostly a combination of poor casting and the comparisons to Rudd's performance. That might seem unfair, but the movie is 95% just the two of them so to compare them is unavoidable. The mismatch of the performances is generally forgivable because the overall chemistry between them is really quite good. Both men at different stages of their lives struggling to connect with each other, the script does a fine job creating naturalistic dialogue between two characters who are so opposite each other. Alvin and Lance simultaneously admire and pity each other for different reasons and the bond they end up forming serves as a reward for the audience rather than a predictable outcome.

The biggest problem with the movie is the sum of all its parts. Even with Green's able and captivating direction, even with Rudd's excellent performance, the movie feels a little hollow. Unfinished even. It might just be the consequence of an indie movie about two guys in the woods, but somehow I feel like it could have gone further. There are interesting spiritual and psychological implications scattered throughout the story, but they mostly get glossed over and unexplored. I'm not sure what exactly the film is missing, but it is definitely devoid of something that could have made it great, rather than merely pleasant. Maybe more characters would have helped, maybe some more conflict. Who's to say? All I can say is that the whole thing felt a little inconsequential. Still, the movie has enough going for it to make it worth checking out. A must-see for anyone who considers themselves to be a fan of Paul Rudd or a lover of indie film in general. Even if it won't blow your mind, it won't offend or put you in a bad mood. It's a very competent, visually striking, and surprisingly sweet film

7/10